mmesantos1 wrote:Hi Sloshy,I have been following this thread and was wondering if you are going to include a GUI that is as easy as Mints installer in your ISO?

Doesn't that remove alot of the customisation that makes Arch, well, Arch?

It isn't 100% against "The Arch Way" to make a GUI installer, as long as you don't hide things from the user. It's worth knowing that Ubuntu does a LOT of things for you, and this results in the weird problems on install/upgrade for some people that seem really hard to fix. There's more than one installer for Arch; the Arch Installation Framework is command-line based and it's the current default, Chakra uses their own Qt-based installer, I'm not sure what KahelOS uses, and I know there's at least one or two more. I'd much rather write my own though and keep it simple; maybe I could just write a GUI front-end to AIF and call it a day. It's actually very easy for the most part. One of the features I'd really like to put in is extra package groups. With AIF, you get to choose what packages you install when you set up your system. I could add groups for wifi drivers, printer drivers, desktop software, office software, music software, "questionably legal libraries", etc. and have it be a "make it from scratch" distribution that Arch usually is, while being easy to use at the same time! Simple in both senses of the word !

Naw, just kidding. I really dig that name! I think it fits great with Kendall's Peppermint!

Oh shoot, and you came up with the name earlier this month . To be honest I had no idea you came up with the name . I'll credit you for coming up with the name or something somewhere if I ever get around to finishing this. Plus, you can't "copyright" a name. Only trademark it. Different things .

FedoraRefugee wrote:Oh, have you tried Shaman yet? Might be a good frontend for Pacman. Just a thought.

Archbang seems to be doing quite well. With their own website and Forum.

Archbang looks nice and I'll have to try it sometime! However, just rebranding Mint in an Arch setting seems rather bland. Of course the distribution will be Mint inspired, and use its tools where it counts, but it will be much more customizable and have a unique style. This isn't simply Mint; it's like Mint but on steroids .

With my recent project I definitely wanted a lot of the simplicity and ease of use associated with a Mint install, but I wanted something "spicier" if you will. The name "Peppermint" was a natural fit as the word "pepper" definitely represents a more aggressive approach. My partner and I wanted something that could be effectively built into a brand. The word "peppermint" is almost universally recognized and with a good logo and some strong support behind the concept it's been easy to establish ourselves as a brand thus far. We wanted a distinct visual difference between us and Mint to make sure there would be no room for confusion. We opted to use Sidux as the significant influence when putting together the default look and feel. Personally I've always been a big fan of darker themes as they seem easier on the eyes so when combined with the required color scheme it was an excellent fit.

I personally don't like the name "Spearmint" for a few reasons. For one it seems like it would be hard to build effective branding for it, as it's a more obscure flavor. Two, after the long lived and much deserved success of Mint, and the astronomical amount of media attention that Peppermint has received it would be hard for a lot of people to take it seriously. Three, it would make it significantly more difficult to work a unique "branding style" into the mix. Mint has an excellent reputation for being conservatively minded, and Peppermint has quickly developed a reputation for being very aggressively minded. It's hard to effectively step into this particular situation carrying the name "Mint" somewhere in your primary branding as both extremes have been covered and it's hard to make an impact in either of those two regards or if you opt to be more "middle of the road" if you will.

Personally I think the best approach here is to add a degree of conservative mentality to the way Arch is usually perceived, keep a lot of the look and feel of Mint but try a slightly darker approach, and concentrate effort into finding a name that reflects that this is a "Mint-centric" distro that is unique in a lot of ways. Branding is an exceedingly important part of how this project will be received and it's something that's often overlooked by a lot of people building Linux distros nowadays. Some immediate thoughts I've had are:

Fern OSBeryl LinuxSage OSAurora Linux

After deciding on a name make sure you put some effort into into things associated with the "brand" such as a logo, a slogan, an adequate website, social media interaction, etc, etc, etc...

I've just skimmed through the last page of the thread... but a few points I would like to throw in...

- For a Live CD/Install CD have a look at Larch. It is basically a bunch of scripts to built yourself an ISO. http://larch.berlios.de/doc/larch_intro.html- The "Arch people" generally like the fine grained customizability that comes with Arch. And like Fedora Refugee said, it's not hard... you just have to read the guide. I suppose you are a one person project, so I would suggest making an AUR package that would install everything else you need to get your Minty desktop from a clean Arch install (apart from installing yaourt). - Shaman pulls in Qt libraries... and honestly, I've found plain pacman and yaourt to be the best combination for package management. Then again, I only use aptitude on the Debian side of things. http://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Pac ... _Frontends

shane wrote:I've just skimmed through the last page of the thread... but a few points I would like to throw in...

- For a Live CD/Install CD have a look at Larch. It is basically a bunch of scripts to built yourself an ISO. http://larch.berlios.de/doc/larch_intro.html- The "Arch people" generally like the fine grained customizability that comes with Arch. And like Fedora Refugee said, it's not hard... you just have to read the guide. I suppose you are a one person project, so I would suggest making an AUR package that would install everything else you need to get your Minty desktop from a clean Arch install (apart from installing yaourt). - Shaman pulls in Qt libraries... and honestly, I've found plain pacman and yaourt to be the best combination for package management. Then again, I only use aptitude on the Debian side of things. http://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Pac ... _Frontends

I would agree. I only use pacman myself. I am just trying to think of a way to make this "more accessible" to the "average person." The ones all these guys are always crying about...

It is kind of an oxymoron though...If you try to make Arch for braindead people it will enf up sucking...I wouldn't know where to begin to find that kind of a balance.

I have been doing a lot of thinking the last few weeks and I am ready to just crawl back into a deep, dark, guru cave with Arch and watch as this "new Linux generation" burns itself out.

FedoraRefugee wrote:I only use pacman myself. I am just trying to think of a way to make this "more accessible" to the "average person." The ones all these guys are always crying about...

Well, you know now my refusal to use Arch, however you want to try here to make it more "accessible"? Why not... And with an installer? Yeah... Great! We are in 2010, even Slackware has an installer... But just about Pacman, as good as it can be, its commands are plainly stupid! Apt and yum are much more logical, simple, easy to remember... Just another reason for my no-use of Arch: I don't like pacman.

K.I.S.S. ===> "Keep It Simple, Stupid""Simplicity is the ultimate sophistication." (Leonardo da Vinci)"Everything should be made as simple as possible, but no simpler." (Albert Einstein)

FedoraRefugee wrote:It is kind of an oxymoron though...If you try to make Arch for braindead people it will enf up sucking...I wouldn't know where to begin to find that kind of a balance.

I know what you mean. I think this is a big weakness and also strength of Arch (depending on who you are).

Whatever criteria you use to build a desktop-ready distro, you cannot satisfy everybody completely. The user will customize it to his/her needs. So, instead of giving users a whole lot of stuff they wouldn't need, give them the bare minimum and make it easy to build their custom system. This is "The Arch Way"... and as much as I've tried to envision what the perfect Arch-based distro would be like, IMO, people who understand Arch will prefer Arch over an off-shoot.

I agree; "Spearmint" was made up after about 10 minutes of thinking so it can't be so good. To the rest of you: I think my ambitions are a *little* too grand. At most, I think the best choice would be to make a way to simplify the Arch install process. I don't need branding, this isn't going to be a "regular distribution", just a different way to get on board, like a ramp instead of stairs to get into a building. Instead of trying to alienate myself from the rest of Arch and just building on top of it, I think I'd rather cooperate and just provide an alternative method of doing things. Like how Sidux makes it easy to get using Debian Sid, only Arch-like.

Sorry if I'm disappointing some of you ! I'm only 16 years old, and making something as huge as Mint would take a lot of energy. I'll still have my project, whatever it'll be called, be somewhat mint-inspired (at the very least using Mint tools), but it won't be nearly as "awesome" or "huge" as I originally planned. I'm going to make a project website soon where I'll further outline goals. I'll edit the main post to reflect my new intentions. Thanks all of you for giving me advice and being supportive!

Main post edited. Here's a comparison of everything the project used to be, compared with what I'm currently planning it as:

Used to be:* Almost entirely equivalent to the regular Linux Mint setup, with Arch-specific tweaks.* Its own default setup with its own packages.* Its own artwork.* Tried to blend simplicity on both ends of the spectrum by having an Arch base.

What's currently planned:* Very basic setup, only including the packages you need. Net-install by default.* Completely modular setup, with the default being the bare basics.* No unique artwork.* Only being simple with installation/initial configuration. Everything else is vanilla.

Some other bonuses that I'm planning but might not come for a while are as follows:* Optional pre-defined setups. Some of these may be clones of other desktops (Mint/Ubuntu/Windows, for example), while most will be vanilla installations and "developer picks".* CD Remastering tool, to create images containing your own personal setup. (MAYBE this could also make LiveCDs as well in the future)

This project's completely mint-independent, though it will have an installation option for the Mint tools. I'll post later with a slightly more official project page !

Sloshy wrote:Main post edited. Here's a comparison of everything the project used to be, compared with what I'm currently planning it as:

Used to be:* Almost entirely equivalent to the regular Linux Mint setup, with Arch-specific tweaks.* Its own default setup with its own packages.* Its own artwork.* Tried to blend simplicity on both ends of the spectrum by having an Arch base.

What's currently planned:* Very basic setup, only including the packages you need. Net-install by default.* Completely modular setup, with the default being the bare basics.* No unique artwork.* Only being simple with installation/initial configuration. Everything else is vanilla.

Some other bonuses that I'm planning but might not come for a while are as follows:* Optional pre-defined setups. Some of these may be clones of other desktops (Mint/Ubuntu/Windows, for example), while most will be vanilla installations and "developer picks".* CD Remastering tool, to create images containing your own personal setup. (MAYBE this could also make LiveCDs as well in the future)

This project's completely mint-independent, though it will have an installation option for the Mint tools. I'll post later with a slightly more official project page !

Sloshy wrote:I don't need branding, this isn't going to be a "regular distribution", just a different way to get on board, like a ramp instead of stairs to get into a building. Instead of trying to alienate myself from the rest of Arch and just building on top of it, I think I'd rather cooperate and just provide an alternative method of doing things. Like how Sidux makes it easy to get using Debian Sid, only Arch-like.

I think more in the Arch community will welcoming to this approach... (look up KahelOS in the Arch forums)... I guess that's just the kind of community they/we have going there.

Heh, that's not exactly what I meant. I mean, more of an auto-configuring thing. Then again, maybe I'm just being a dreamer. I couldn't write something like that even if I tried. I should focus on smaller things first. Never mind, everybody! I'll still try porting packages from Mint/etc., but I'm just being too optimistic with this. Nevermind, and thanks for the advice ^^.

FedoraRefugee wrote:Sloshy, I hope you have not been taking my lame attempts at humor seriously!

I think packaging the Mint tools for the AUR is a great start!

Yup, and that's what I'll just continue doing, hence why I re-named this thread. I've realized that building something on top of Arch takes away the whole point of using Arch, as some people have said. Dang, I wish there was a way to hide 1.5 pages in this thread so it wouldn't be much of a bother to read through all of my embarrassment .

ikey wrote:Sloshy, just run with it and see where it takes you Also, happy birthday

FedoraRefugee wrote:Sloshy, I hope you have not been taking my lame attempts at humor seriously!

I think packaging the Mint tools for the AUR is a great start!

Yup, and that's what I'll just continue doing, hence why I re-named this thread. I've realized that building something on top of Arch takes away the whole point of using Arch, as some people have said. Dang, I wish there was a way to hide 1.5 pages in this thread so it wouldn't be much of a bother to read through all of my embarrassment .

ikey wrote:Sloshy, just run with it and see where it takes you Also, happy birthday

Thank you !

Embarrassment? Not at all! I still think it is one heck of an idea! Arch WOULD make a great base for an easy to install, new user friendly distro. The reason is because you can build it without all the "junk" that is in the average distro. OTOH, what you came out with would probably NOT appeal much to Arch users who value the KISS philosophy of Arch. You would essentially have to make all the choices for the user so it would take away that one aspect that attracts most of us to Arch in the first place...But even so...The new user would benefit from a simpler, streamlined distro that did not have as many bugs. You would have to do something about the updates, you would not want the Arch update to break anything for your distro user. I think Mint found a good way to do this. How you could work that into a rolling release is beyond me, maybe you would just have to release the new distro every month or year instead...

No, there is a lot of food for thought here. I wish I had your skill. I am a talented enough user but I am no geek. I can create a binary from source but I do not even have the skills (or time) to be a package maintainer. Whatever you do with it, have fun!

FedoraRefugee wrote:No, there is a lot of food for thought here. I wish I had your skill. I am a talented enough user but I am no geek. I can create a binary from source but I do not even have the skills (or time) to be a package maintainer. Whatever you do with it, have fun!

Creating packages really isn't that difficult, especially if there are tools created for the distro to do it. I thought the same as you, but decided to get my feet wet anyway. The most difficult part of building distro packages is determining the dependencies that are needed for it to install properly. Once you have that down, it really is a simple process.

Embarrassing? Don't discredit your work... Scratch your own itch... that is the open source way. Surely there will be at least one other person who will agree with you. If there are more... well then good for your project.

I’m doing a (free) operating system (just a hobby, won’t be big andprofessional like gnu) for 386(486) AT clones.- Linus Torvalds 25 Aug 1991 (his first post about Linux)

FedoraRefugee wrote:You would have to do something about the updates, you would not want the Arch update to break anything for your distro user. I think Mint found a good way to do this. How you could work that into a rolling release is beyond me, maybe you would just have to release the new distro every month or year instead...

As I have already said elsewhere in the forum a good way to make a rolling release more stable is the Parsix way and their Continent repo with Debian Testing ("Our annual release cycle consists of two major and four minor versions"):

The Continent repository consists of the whole Debian testing archive minus the official Parsix repository packages. Note that the continent repository for Parsix Ramon is frozen now and will not receive updates from Debian except critical fixes. This is a new release policy to make Parsix more stable like approach. The Continent repository will be continued to be updated for the next Parsix release code name Viola and will be frozen before the final release of it, and so on.

(From the Parsix site)

It's a good, interesting model but of course you must have some infrastructure for that...

K.I.S.S. ===> "Keep It Simple, Stupid""Simplicity is the ultimate sophistication." (Leonardo da Vinci)"Everything should be made as simple as possible, but no simpler." (Albert Einstein)